News
Tesla’s 4680 cell production process outlined in Giga Berlin’s revised filings
Tesla’s revised documents for Gigafactory Berlin have been posted online, and they are a treasure trove of information. The documents provided some new details about Tesla’s planned 4680 battery plant in Gigafactory Berlin, which Elon Musk noted is on track to be one of the world’s largest battery production facilities. They also outlined how Tesla’s 4680 cells are produced.
While sections of the filing pertaining to the planned 4680 battery cell plant in Giga Berlin were blacked out due to sensitive information that could not be made public, the documents show some important tidbits about the upcoming facility. This includes the facility’s cell production operations over four floors, with anode and cathode production on the first floor and tabless cell production on the third floor. The battery plant is massive, requiring large foundations similar to Gigafactory Berlin’s Phase 1 zone.
Anode and cathode production in the 1st floor pic.twitter.com/tOoV4b3Iur
— Tobias Lindh (@tobilindh) June 18, 2021
Most importantly, Tesla also submitted a simplified diagram of its 4680 battery cell production process, though most of the diagram was blacked out in the revised filing’s public release. However, the company provided a brief overview of how its new battery cell will be produced in the upcoming facility (roughly translated through Google Translate).
“The battery the Gigafactory Berlin requires special systems and process steps. The anodes and cathodes consist of coated current collector foils. Copper is used as the material for the anode foil and aluminum is used for the cathode foil. The anode and cathode components are manufactured in mixed processes (A020-01 and A020-02), which only use materials in powder form. The new materials used are tested and approved in our own laboratory (A020-11).
“In order for the powder coating to adhere to the two films, they must first be pre-coated with a thin layer of adhesive (substrate) (A020-03 and A020-04). This substrate is delivered in containers. The pre-coating is necessary because a dry coating with powder takes place. After the anode and cathode components have been mixed, they are applied as a coating to the respective substrate-coated film in order to establish electrical contact (A020-05 and A020-06). The current collector foils, coated with the anode or cathode components, result in the finished anode or cathode.
Page 239 pic.twitter.com/7gDk2fSeVy
— Giga Berlin / Gigafactory 4 (@gigafactory_4) June 18, 2021
The revised filings also provided a general idea of how Tesla’s tabless cell production works. Among these is the fact that the finished 4680 cells would be subjected to 10 days’ worth of curing after their formation.
“The anode or cathode is then cut to the required lengths with a laser in the “tabless process” (A020-08). The anode, the cathode and the separator are alternately placed one on top of the other and rolled up into a roll. This roller is then inserted into a metal housing, which is manufactured from steel rollers in a die-cutting and deep-drawing process (A020-07). In the assembly area, the final assembly and filling of the cell takes place with small amounts of electrolyte (approx. 10% of the cell weight) (A020-09).
“The electrolyte is absorbed by the electrode coatings and enables the lithium ions to move back and forth between the anode and cathode. The housing is then closed with a lid in a welding process. The last step is the formation (A020-10) of the cell. In the formation process, the cell is electrically started up by charging and discharging it under different temperature conditions. The finished cell remains in this area for approx. 10 days and is then put to further use. The cells produced are subjected to random quality control in our own laboratory (A020-11).”
A link to Tesla’s filings for Gigafactory Berlin could be found here.
Do you have anything to share with the Teslarati Team? We’d love to hear from you, email us at tips@teslarati.com.
Lifestyle
NTSB findings on fatal Tesla crash tell a very different story
The NTSB confirmed the driver, not Tesla’s FSD, caused the fatal Texas house crash.
The National Transportation Safety Board released preliminary findings Wednesday confirming that a Tesla driver, not the vehicle’s software, caused a fatal crash in Katy, Texas in June. The driver, 44-year-old Michael Butler, had engaged Full Self-Driving Supervised mode on Rose Hollow Lane, a residential street with a 30 mph speed limit, before manually overriding the system by pressing the accelerator pedal all the way to 100%. Data recovered from the 2025 Tesla Model 3 showed the vehicle was traveling over 70 miles per hour when it struck a home and killed 76-year-old Martha Avila, who was inside. Weather was clear, the road was dry, and it was daylight.
Texas man charged in fatal Tesla crash where he blamed Autopilot
Butler told authorities he had passed out at the wheel. But security camera footage obtained by the NTSB told a different story, and showed the car accelerating through an intersection before leaving the road entirely. Police also found that Butler’s phone had Google searches including the terms “Tesla FSD not aggressive enough 2026” and “Tesla FSD too timid,” raising serious questions about how he was using the system before the crash. Butler has since been charged with manslaughter. The victim’s family has filed a lawsuit against both Butler and Tesla, alleging negligence.
The NTSB findings aligned directly with what Tesla VP of AI Software Ashok Elluswamy had already stated publicly on X in the weeks after the crash, writing that “the driver manually overrode self-driving by pressing the accelerator all the way to 100%.” The data confirmed his account.
Yup. In this case, the driver manually overrode self-driving by pressing the accelerator all the way to 100% of the accel pedal in this residential area. They reached a speed of 73 mph during the crash, and had the accelerator pressed even after the crash.
— Ashok Elluswamy (@aelluswamy) June 22, 2026
Lucid CEO Silvio Napoli responded to rumors of an imminent bankruptcy that was reportedly being mulled after a report stated the automaker was working with the firm AlixPartners to iron out its next steps.
The company felt a massive loss on Wall Street yesterday, as the report essentially pushed the stock down as much as 55 percent on Tuesday.
The report, published initially by Eletric-Vehicles.com, claimed Lucid was essentially in dire straits and was told by AlixPartners, a commonly used restructuring advisor, to either take shares private or file for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection.
Lucid’s head of Communications, Nick Twork, immediately challenged the report and stated the company “has sufficient liquidity to carry its operations well into next year.”
Now, the company’s CEO is chiming in as well, stating that the report is “so far from the facts that they require a direct response.”
Napoli said:
“Lucid is not considering bankruptcy or a transaction to take the company private. Those reports are false. The Board did not explore either scenario. Period.
As disclosed in our most recent quarterly filing, Lucid has sufficient liquidity to fund its operations well into next year.
We work with outside advisors to improve operational performance and execution. They are not advising Lucid on a take-private transaction or bankruptcy, and any suggestion that they have recommended either course of action to management or the Board is false.
My priority is clear: turn this company around. That is where the leadership team and I are focused.
I look forward to providing a full update during our quarterly earnings call on August 4th.”
🚨 Lucid CEO Silvio Napoli calls rumors of financial issues “so far from the facts that they require a direct response.”
Read his full remarks here: https://t.co/t3Pg1NHvzy pic.twitter.com/LvHUPhO4Qf
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 15, 2026
It seems pretty clear that Lucid is confident things will be okay, and, to be honest, they should not have much to worry about, especially considering the company has been backed by the Saudi Public Investment Fund (PIF) for years. It has solid financial backing, and its sales, while weak, are pretty much right on par with a company of this age.
Lucid also sent a Cease & Desist letter to the publication for their report.
Lucid shares have rebounded nicely and are up nearly 21 percent at the time of publication. As soon as the company dispelled the rumors of bankruptcy yesterday, the stock began to climb back toward more reasonable levels.
Tesla has once again demonstrated strong customer focus by swiftly addressing and fully refunding a bizarre Supercharger pricing glitch that affected drivers in Atlantic Canada.
The issue surfaced earlier this month when the Tesla app began displaying dramatically inflated per-minute charging rates at stations in Prince Edward Island and parts of New Brunswick.
One widely shared screenshot from a Charlottetown, PEI Supercharger showed rates reaching ridiculous levels: $6.00 per minute for the 180-250 kW tier, along with $3.57/min for 100-180 kW and $2.29/min for 60-100 kW.
Correct pricing will be going live at midnight tonight. All fees since July 2nd 2026 will be waived.
— Tesla Charging (@TeslaCharging) July 13, 2026
These figures were several times higher than normal Supercharger pricing in the region.
To put the error in perspective, charging at the highest incorrect rate would have been shockingly expensive.
At 250 kW, a common charging speed at Superchargers, a vehicle pulls roughly 4.17 kWh per minute. Under the glitch, a driver spending just 10 minutes at peak power would face a $60 bill. A typical 20- to 30-minute session to add meaningful range could have cost $120 to $180 or more, before any congestion fees.
Tesla gets another layer of gamification with Free Supercharging on the line
By comparison, standard Canadian Supercharger rates usually fall between $0.25 and $0.60 per kWh, making a similar session cost roughly $15–$40. The erroneous per-minute structure, combined with the inflated numbers, turned what should be a convenient stop into a potential financial shock.
The glitch appears to have started sometime around early July, and quickly drew attention on social media as owners questioned whether Tesla had implemented steep hidden increases. Some drivers even reported seeing $0 charges in their history, indicating broader billing confusion.
Tesla’s official Charging account on X stated that correct pricing would roll out at midnight on July 13, so the fix is already in effect. More importantly, the company announced it would waive all fees for every Supercharger session since July 2. This blanket waiver covers the entire affected period without requiring users to file individual claims, with automated refunds expected soon. The decision affects stations in PEI and nearby areas in New Brunswick and Nova Scotia.
It’s a classy move, and rather than issuing partial credits or forcing owners to submit support tickets, Tesla simply absorbed the cost of the system error and made drivers whole. In an industry where hidden fees and bill disputes are common, Tesla’s proactive, no-questions-asked approach reinforces owner trust and highlights the company’s commitment to service excellence.
The incident, while disruptive for a short time, ultimately showcases Tesla’s ability to own mistakes and prioritize customer satisfaction. Atlantic Canada Tesla owners can now charge with confidence again, knowing the company has their back when technology glitches occur.
In an era of complex EV billing, such transparency and generosity are refreshing and set a positive example for the industry.
NTSB findings on fatal Tesla crash tell a very different story
Elon Musk’s Texas ranch to showcase the lifelong work that changed the world
